| |
You are here: Experts > Homework Help > Buddhism > Buddhists > renunciation in buddhism
Buddhists - renunciation in buddhism
Expert: Laurie McLauglin - 11/3/2009
Question
QUESTION: Hi Laurie,
I'm 25, female, British and have been practising Buddhist meditation for about a year. I have a question regarding renunciation in Buddhism.
I read a lot of Buddhist articles, discussions and things on the internet and in books. Many of them seem to say that renunciation (either physical or mental) of worldly possessions, hobbies and interests, singing and dancing, family ties, friendships, work etc is advisable in order to progress spiritually.
What is the real difference between the "worldly" life and the "spiritual" life? Most things I read seem to regard the so-called "worldly" life with contempt. What is this worldly life?
Is it chasing after money and fortune (which I do not do)?
Is it wanting a loving relationship (which I do, but how going to a monastery would help with that I do not know. Also - I do not particularly wish to renounce my desire for a loving relationship - to love and be loved seems pretty natural and human to me).
Is it fulfilling a role in the family, thus providing love and support to those around (which I do, which I am happy to do, and which brings me and my family members around me love, security and enjoyment).
Is it listening to music (which I do - I think Beethoven's 9th symphony is the greatest piece of music ever composed and I think, as many people before me have thought, that it has elements of the divine. The title is "Ode to Joy" and the words go like this: "All men become brothers." Is this an ill-inducing worldly pleasure? How about dancing and singing? I have sung in choirs before, and one of the most powerful and beautiful experiences of my life was singing in the chorus of Beethoven's 9th symphony. Over one hundred human beings, each in his / her own private world, coming together to create a harmony, singing about all men becoming brothers.... is this a worldly pleasure that it would be best to renounce?
Or perhaps it's work. I am a language teacher. Would it be conducive to my happiness to renounce this? Languages, changeable and unreliable as they are (yes, I know that important feelings and concepts cannot be defined in words), are also incredibly beautiful. Listen to Pablo Neruda's poetry (though it's nicer written in Spanish!): "I do not love you as the plant that never blooms, but carries in itself the light of hidden flowers" and tell me that's just another human foible, a worldly pleasure to be renounced!
Is it friendship with non-Buddhists? I've read many accounts of people renouncing their friends to pursue something "higher", more spiritual. I have a wide circle of friends, some of whom I feel a deep connection with. With the closest of my friends, I can talk about more or less anything. We can sit in silence and be completely at ease. We can often understand each other without having to say anything at all. We can laugh for no reason. These are probably just meaningless worldly delusions that should be give up for something better.
Tell me that these are things to renounce, and I'll consider it.
Best wishes,
Katy Yelland
ANSWER: Hello Katy -
Thank you for letting me answer your question.
This worldly life is called "Samsara". It is the cycle of birth, ageing, sickness and death. It is a place full of suffering. Buddha Shakyamuni before he became Buddha Shakyamuni saw much suffering. So his first teaching "The First Turning of the wheel of Dharma" was about suffering - The Four Noble Truths. He taught that we are unhappy and we suffer because we do not see the world as it is. We grasp at things as permanent and unchanging that will by their very nature change. All things change. But we refuse to accept that and that leads to suffering.
Since this worldly life is full of changeable suffering, it is to be let go of. We should renounce it because all it will lead to is suffering. Instead, we should work on our minds and by working on our minds we will be able to find peace and calm. We will learn to see the world as it truly is and stop our own suffering. We will never have to suffer any more.
But as long as we cling and grasp at things like posessions and relationships, we will surely always suffer.
When I was considering whether or not to become Budddhist, I had the same thoughts as you. I loved music and pretty things and could not imagine living without them. I love Beethoven's Ninth the best too.
Buddha never said you could not enjoy things in this world. He simply said that they bring suffering. So if you like Beethoven's Ninth, continue to listen to it. But if you follow the Buddha, you will learn not to have attachment to it. It is the attachment that will cause you suffering. Let us say you love classical music a lot. Let us say it brings you much emotional pleasure - so much so you could not imagine living without it. What happens if one day, you begin to go deaf. Now you will suffer because you realize that you will have to live without something you are so attached to. However, instead when you listen to Classical music you can truly appreciate it and enjoy it but you create no attachement to it, then if you go deaf, you will not suffer. There will be nothing you lost.
Remember, Buddha taught everything so that we stop suffering.
Again, chasing after money means that you have an attachment to it and you might even hurt someone so that you get more money than the other person. Then not only are you suffering but you are causing suffering to others.
However, if you simply recognize that you must have money to live and puruse a career that does least damage to other sentient beings to get it then there is no harm. If you lose the money you have, you will not be unhappy because you know that the nature of things is impermanence. If you get a lot of money, you will not grasp at it because you know that grasping causes suffering.
But you must have money to live here in the West especially. If you have money to live where you are not always wondering where your next meal will come from then rejoice - that means you will have more time to practice the Dharma and improve yourself so you can become enlightened and if you are a Mahayana practitioner, you can then help others become enlightened.
Of course it is fine to love and be loved. Again, it is fine if you can learn to do it with no attachment. If your lover dies suddenly, you will not become depressed or commit suicide. If you can learn the tools to do this, then you will not suffer and because you are not suffering you will more easily be able to help others. Eventually of course, when you have reached a high enough state of understanding of the dharma teachings, then you will probably choose a celibate life and you will renounce the world because by doing that it will allow you time to practice the dharma more and the more time you practice the sooner you will become enlightened.
Buddha Shakyamuni taught 84 thousand teachings. Why did he teach so many? Each teaching he gave he tailored it for his specific audience.
He knew that each group or individual he taught was at a different stage in their emotional and spiritual development. So he said that just as a doctor would not prescribe the same medicine to two different people for two different illnesses, neither did he teach in the same way to everyone. He taught each person the lessons they needed to hear the way they needed to hear it.
So for some people like myself, living in a Buddhist Retreat Center and wishing to ordain as a Buddhist Nun at 51 years of age after working in professional theatre for 30 years, I am ready for a bit more renunciation than someone who has not had the life experiences I have.
You are in your prime - you are in the middle of experiencing the joys the world has to offer. So of course it would not seem right to you to just drop everything and renounce the world.
However - where all human beings are the same is that we all suffer. And Buddha did come to understand why we suffer and each of his 84 thousand teachings was trying as hard as he could to help each and every sentient being to be free of suffering.
We suffer because we grasp at things and hold on to them and expect them not to change or leave us. When the do change as they must because change is the law of the world, we suffer - unless we learn to train our minds to see things as they really are - dependant arisings - that they are created, they abide for a while and then they leave or die or disappear - like notes in a musical score.
Perhaps all Buddha was trying to get us to see was to enjoy the notes as they arise and then let them go. If we held on to the fist note of the Ode to Joy, there would be no second note. But we allow them to arise we enjoy them and let them pass away and allow other notes to arise.
We suffer because we cling to things of the past and are frightened or worried about things in the future - all we have is now - that is what the teachings say - that is what meditation teaches -
But instead we allow our egos to hold on to things in the past and don't want them to change - then we suffer when they do. If we slowly, slowly teach our egos to let go of grasping to the past or attaching to what might happen in the future then we will not suffer.
Then eventually, slowly, slowly, when we are ready we will begin to realize that this world of samsara - changeable suffering - is to be abandoned because it can only bring suffering - but only when we are ready should we renounce it - otherwise, if we renounce it before we are ready, we will suffer - and Buddha in his great compassion would never want anyone to suffer for any reason.
I hope some of that made sense.
Don't hesitate to ask any further questions if you wish.
And I hope you get to Sing Ode To Joy again soon as it is truly beautiful.
Namaste - Laurie
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Hi Laurie,
Thanks very much for your long and thoughtful reply. I have a couple of things I'd like to ask you about what you said. I hope you don't mind.
"Since this worldly life is full of changeable suffering, it is to be let go of. We should renounce it because all it will lead to is suffering." - this worldly life is birth, sickness, aging and death. Yes but I'm alive, I was born, I'll probably get ill in the future, and I'll most certainly age and die. Isn't ACCEPTANCE of that, and then sticking with it, the idea? Rather than renouncing it and looking for something else?
"Buddha never said you could not enjoy things in this world. He simply said that they bring suffering." - I see what you mean, but is that not just a nicer way of saying "don't do it!" i.e. don't listen to music in case you go deaf, don't love in case you get hurt, don't live cos you're eventually going to die. "You can do what you want, but if you do X you'll suffer. But go ahead!" That's not a choice. It's worded as a choice but it's basically a passive-aggressive version of the Christian "you'll go to hell" god?!
"each group or individual he taught was at a different stage in their emotional and spiritual development." - I feel like here there is some kind of spiritual snobbery going on, as though the monastics are somehow superior to the laity. Part of me thinks that if a person wishes to deal with his or her emotional / spiritual / psychological dysfunctions, it's surely better to put oneself in situations where these things will be faced, rather than retreating away from society. For example, if you have problems with jealousy in romantic relationships, being in a romantic relationship is surely the best place you're gonna be in order to deal with that!
"this world of samsara - changeable suffering - is to be abandoned because it can only bring suffering" - i don't understand this at all - how can we "abandon" the world when we live in it? as physical human beings, we're bound to the world, for this lifetime at least.
"Eventually of course, when you have reached a high enough state of understanding of the dharma teachings, then you will probably choose a celibate life and you will renounce the world because by doing that it will allow you time to practice the dharma more and the more time you practice the sooner you will become enlightened." - Many people do, sure, but even within the Buddhist community, I am guessing that monks and nuns are a minority. Are they the spiritual elite, and the rest of us just aren't, and will never be, spiritually mature enough? Isn't this distinction between the "worldly" and the "spiritual" life just a false dualism that, in Buddhism, should really be got rid of?
I don't understand what you mean "to renounce the world" - do you mean rather to renounce society? I think perhaps there is a confusion of terms here. As far as I see it, "the world" includes animals, trees, mountains, forests and lakes as well as nuclear bombs, financial crises and George Bush. How a person, as an inherently worldly creature (in the general sense of the term "world") can possibly renounce it, I do not know. It's like saying I'm going to renounce my body. ???
Best wishes, :-)
Ms. Confused
Answer
Hello again Katy.
I am happy to try to answer your questions again. I will answer your questions from the bottom up.
Interestingly enough you asked the perfect question at the bottom of your second question. You said “I don't understand what you mean "to renounce the world" - do you mean rather to renounce society? I think perhaps there is a confusion of terms here. As far as I see it, "the world" includes animals, trees, mountains, forests and lakes as well as nuclear bombs, financial crises and George Bush. How a person, as an inherently worldly creature (in the general sense of the term "world") can possibly renounce it, I do not know. It's like saying I'm going to renounce my body. ???”
The phrase that is the key one in that statement is “How a person, as an inherently worldly creature….. can possibly renounce it.”
I suspect Buddha himself asked many of the same questions you are asking when he set his mind to becoming enlightened.
One of them possible was - Do we exist inherently? Here is a definition I found for inherent. –adjective
1. existing in someone or something as a permanent and inseparable element, quality, or attribute: an inherent distrust of strangers.
If something exists inherently, it would exist permanently. It would be solid. It would not change. We think we are inherently existent. But if we were, we would be permanent and never change. But look how much we have changed from the time we were five years old. Instead, the Buddha said we exist because of dependent arising. We exist moment to moment due to causes and conditions. The causes and conditions are constantly changing. Therefore we are constantly changing. You are not the same person you were before you started reading this.
Buddha would say that animals, trees, mountains, forests, lakes, nuclear bombs, financial crises and George Bush are phenomena that come together based on causes and conditions. They arise dependent on many, many things.
Let’s take a mountain. It appears permanent and inherently existent but it exists because of the atoms that make it. These atoms came together due to the causes and conditions of the earth at the point that mountain was formed; i.e. the earth had to be a certain temperature, the quality of the material had to be just right to turn it solid, the weather had to be just right for it to cool perhaps into just that certain shape. And it continues to exist due to the causes and conditions that there is no earthquake in that area or there is not one strip mining, etc.
How could George Bush for example be inherently existent? If he were, everyone would see the same way. Everyone would hate him. Or everyone would love him, because he would be permanent and not able to change.
A chocolate cake looks inherently existent. But if it were, we would not be able to eat it. It would be incapable of change, so if we were to try to bite it, it would not melt in our mouth in deliciousness.
The more one looks at the world from this point, the more one sees that pretty much everything one comes in contact with each day is a dependent arising and not an inherently existent thing.
Yet we suffer because we grasp everything as real and inherently existent. If we renounce the world as inherently existent then, all we have left is a conventional existence of dependent arising phenomena.
Buddha was not saying that we should renounce this conventional existence. We need it to be able to live. We need to have a human rebirth in order to use it to learn the lessons we need to learn to reach enlightenment. So what we renounce is the grasping at conventional existence which we mistake for inherent existence – grasping at a world that by its very nature is dependent arising, that must and will change. We renounce grasping because the things we grasp at will because they change only bring us suffering.
Does that make sense?
And yes, we renounce grasping at our body as inherently existent. Every 6 years, I believe, every cell in the body has replicated. We do not renounce our conventionally existent body which we need to inhabit in order to gain the experiences we need to reach enlightenment. But we renounce grasping at it as real. We renounce grasping at it as perfect and not changeable. We accept that it will arise, abide for a time and pass away. We accept the changes in our body simply as the result of karma; causes and conditions – and therefore we do not suffer.
We renounce our body as being any more important than anyone else’s body and eventually, after long periods of practice, we are able to offer our body like the Buddha did to a starving mother lion and her 5 cubs, out of great compassion, without suffering.
You ask if monks and nuns are the spiritual elite. If monks and nuns are practicing correctly, they are putting all other sentient beings above themselves. They are withdrawing from the pleasures of this life in order to spend as much time as they can working on themselves in order to become a Bodhisattva in order to help all sentient beings and always put their needs and desires above their own.
That is why in other countries monks and nuns are so revered. If they are practicing correctly, they are trying to perfect themselves as quickly as possible to be of benefit to all sentient beings as quickly as possible.
All sentient beings from the smallest bug to the largest mammal have Buddha nature. So in that way no one is any better than any other. In Buddhism everyone is going to become enlightened eventually.
If we are practicing correctly, there is no elitism. Because feeling superior to another involves the ego. And the ego is what we are trying to eliminate. It is by cherishing ourselves that we suffer and by cherishing others that we can be truly happy. If we are practicing correctly, we believe this and work to put it into practice.
You mention spiritual snobbery again. If we are practicing correctly, we practice wisdom and skillful means. We work through study and meditation to become wise enough to speak skillfully to each person we come in contact with. I would not say what I am saying to you to anyone else. I simply listen to what you say and as skillfully as possible say things in the way I believe you need to hear them. Is that closer to wisdom or closer to snobbery?
The Buddha agrees with you. If we are practicing correctly, we don’t only call our spiritual practice what goes on on our meditation cushion. We must put it into practice. Only by living in this world, only by having a human rebirth can we grow and learn enough to achieve enlightenment.’
However, if I am an alcoholic and you are an alcoholic, how can I help you stop suffering? If we are both suffering from the same delusions, how can either of us help the other? As Jesus said, how do you get the speck out of your friend’s eye? You get the speck out of your friend’s eye by first getting the twig out of your own. And if one has enough wisdom, one realizes that that does not make one superior or better or more important because I have gotten the speck out of my own eye. Again, as we work on ourselves, we work on lessening the hold our ego grasping has on us – that part that says “I am better than you are”.
If you and I are both in a dysfunctional romantic relationship, how can we help each other? Neither of us has the wisdom and understanding to do it. Oh sure it can happen, I am not saying it can’t but if you are able to step back from the situation and come back to it with a clear mind and great compassion, then you can help me even more.
Buddha never said not to participate in things in this world like listening to music. He merely stated that if we do participate in things, we should not attach ourselves to any of it. He also did say that we should refrain from doing things that do not lead us toward enlightenment. That is why Buddha in his first teaching on the 4 noble truths, taught the 4th noble truth – the eightfold path. This eightfold path will keep us from future suffering. Of course when you ordain, you are discouraged from listening to music because it can pull you away from your main focus which is reaching enlightenment in order to help all sentient beings.
You say “You can do what you want, but if you do X you'll suffer. But go ahead!" That's not a choice. It's worded as a choice but it's basically a passive-aggressive version of the Christian "you'll go to hell" god?!” So, do you think your mother telling you not to put your hand on the stove when it was hot because it might burn you a passive aggressive statement? Do you think that if your friend tells you not to drive because you have had too much to drink a passive aggressive statement? Or could these statements be from someone who cares for you unconditionally and wants only your happiness and safety?
Again, the point to Buddha’s teachings were not to say don’t do something but rather if you do something, do not attach to it because it is changeable suffering and because things are simply dependent arising and not inherent and if you act like they are, you will be hurt.
It is not renouncing life itself – it is renouncing the attachment to and the grasping at and the delusions that we carry with us about life – for example that it is inherently existent – these are what we are supposed to renounce.
Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater here.
The Buddha taught that the only way to reach enlightenment is by having a human rebirth. He said that because it is the only realm where we will have a mind that can understand the concepts that lead to wisdom and also through our own suffering and wanting that suffering to end for ourselves and others develop the compassion needed to reach enlightenment.
And yes we are supposed to stick with it until we become enlightened. But it makes no sense to realize the suffering of existence and not try to seek a way to alleviate the suffering.
Feel free to ask any follow up questions or clarify anything that is unclear.
Thank you for your thoughtful questions -
Namaste - Laurie
Add to this Answer Ask a Question
|
|
